Why was Spectacular Spider-Man TV show so good?

**Mistah K88** · 07-08-2012, 09:49 AM

I loved the fact that this show would introduce the villains well before their superpowered origin episode. Also, this show brought Gwen and George Stacy back into relevance (as no one had used them before). I didn't care for lion Kraven, it was mentioned that there were longterm plans for him, and those plans were connected to plans with John Jameson (Man Wolf?)

I also liked the fact that this show was bold enough to change the races of minor characters in order to make it more diverse. I was afraid when the show stared that Randy and Robbie were going to be the token black guys...and they're related! I was pleasantly surprised that we had a couple Asians, Latinos, blacks, and even Indian people in this show. With more people of color in the show it actually seems not forced at all and we don't have a "token".

It's a shame that the series had to end when it did, and on such a rough note as well (which seems to be a plague on Spidey shows). Peter dumped Liz to be with Gwen, but Gwen is guilt tripped into staying with Harry. Marvel must hate Roderick Kingsley though. He appears in this show, it gets cancelled...then in comics they kill him off for Phil Ulrich.

Originally Posted by PwrdOff

Spectacular was such a great show, the characters and relationships were so fleshed out, and the art style was a bit simplistic it definitely had its own charm. It struck a pretty nice balance in tone, not being too reliant on cheap gags for laughs, or dark and moody scenes for drama. And oh my goodness, Gwen Stacy was such a sweetheart, she completely outshined the rest of the supporting cast and even Peter at times. The actual superheroics seemed to take a backseat to the interpersonal stuff though, but they still did a good job showcasing a lot of the expansive rogues gallery and upping the dramatic stakes when necessary. Of course, none of what made the show good could work if you tried to integrate it with the rest of the MU, which is probably why they didn't try to stick with that formula for Ultimate. It's definitely a great example of how to take a property that's been done so many times, and make it seem fresh and enjoyable for all audiences, while losing none of the charm that made it great in the first place. Marvel could definitely learn a lesson or two from it.

To tell you the truth, I did like the fact that the show was forced to stay in the Spidey corner of the Marvel Universe. It was somewhat like BTAS; as in self contained in a way.

Say what you want about the artstyle, but the designs themselves were pretty solid.

**tigerkaya** · 07-08-2012, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by Mistah K88

To tell you the truth, I did like the fact that the show was forced to stay in the Spidey corner of the Marvel Universe. It was somewhat like BTAS; as in self contained in a way.

Say what you want about the artstyle, but the designs themselves were pretty solid.

But I liked the fact it stayed in the Spidey corner. It made Spidey's world much bigger. The rest of the Marvel U I like it better if they were relegated to guest appearance only like in The New Adventures of Batman season. For me I just don't like that the Marvel U has to play such a pivotal influencing on Spidey. Turning him into a minion of SHIELD and having him face other non Spidey villains that are relegated to comedic slapstick. If they wanted Spidey to team up with other heroes on a daily basis they should just create a Brave and The Bold version of a Spider-Man show.

**KCJ506** · 07-09-2012, 07:15 PM

Originally Posted by dingbat46

The art always kept me away. Straight up, I find it looks like shit.

The reason they went with that art was because it was easier to animate the characters that way, provide better fight sequences and have Spider-man move fast like he's supposed to. Especially on a television animation budget. On a show like Spider-man you want the animation to be fast paced and moving, with all the webslinging and agility and aerial battles.

While the 90s show had better and more realisitc designs, but the animation wasn't very good. In fact, as the show moved on, it got downright sloppy.(heavy overuse of stock footage) The character movement was stiff and Spider-man didn't move that fast or that well. People will say "It was the times. They made due with what they had." When you have stellar productions such as Batman TAS, Superman TAS, and Gargoyles airing at the same time, there's really no excuse for Marvel's flagship character. Especially considering how good the animation in the first episode was.

Originally Posted by wyokid

The animation was poor.

No the animation was fine. Your problem seems to be with the animation style. That would be how the characters are drawn. The actual animation is the movement of the characters. Style is not animation. People mix these two up entirely too much.

the plots were unoriginal (most of them already being done in Spider-Man (1994)

Huh?

**refrax5** · 07-09-2012, 08:42 PM

Originally Posted by wyokid

I actually found the show quite boring. The animation was poor, the jokes were lame, the plots were unoriginal (most of them already being done in Spider-Man (1994) which took them mainly right from the comics so it gave a terrible sense of deja vu), the writing didn't really seem like it was geared towards getting new people into Spider-Man but rather to cater to people who were already fans (who were going to watch the show anyway so why bother?), and it never captured the fun that Spider-Man should be. I think that had it focused on telling original stories and lightened it's tone a bit it could have had have been a show that would be set in the history books, instead it's just a rehash of stories that have already been told.

To be fair I may be judging it harshly because the last time I saw it was when it aired and I hated it then. Best part was the theme song.

I thought it was pretty good, but yeah, the jokes were awful, Eddie Brock and Peter always calling each other "bro" was really annoying and I thought Peter himself was just kind of an irritating character sometimes. It was a pretty good show overall, but I don't quite understand the obsession everyone has with it.

**Mr. Holmes** · 07-09-2012, 08:57 PM

Originally Posted by refrax5

I thought it was pretty good, but yeah, the jokes were awful, Eddie Brock and Peter always calling each other "bro" was really annoying and I thought Peter himself was just kind of an irritating character sometimes. It was a pretty good show overall, but I don't quite understand the obsession everyone has with it.

Well it was by far the most accurate adaptation of the Spider-Man mythos outside of comics. It's his equivalent of BTAS. Not to mention, it was replaced by Ultimate Spider-Man. Now THAT has awful as hell jokes.

**Darman456** · 07-11-2012, 10:24 PM

Originally Posted by wyokid

I actually found the show quite boring. The animation was poor, the jokes were lame, the plots were unoriginal (most of them already being done in Spider-Man (1994) which took them mainly right from the comics so it gave a terrible sense of deja vu), the writing didn't really seem like it was geared towards getting new people into Spider-Man but rather to cater to people who were already fans (who were going to watch the show anyway so why bother?), and it never captured the fun that Spider-Man should be. I think that had it focused on telling original stories and lightened it's tone a bit it could have had have been a show that would be set in the history books, instead it's just a rehash of stories that have already been told.

To be fair I may be judging it harshly because the last time I saw it was when it aired and I hated it then. Best part was the theme song.

This coming from the guy who like the Ultimate Spider-Man TV show? What? Are you even allowed to hate TSSM while liking USM? I swear there must be a law of nature that says that cannot happen. The Spectacular Spider-Man was the perfect Spider-Man show. The animations were fluid. The designs did grow on me (or they got better, not sure because every time I watch the first episodes compared to the last, the last look better). It's funny that Sony could get Spider-Man right but MARVEL has found a way to eff up Spider-Man. Let me remind you that these are both cartoons for children. The difference is, TSSM actually did a good job because it didn't treat the audience like they were stupid. Just because they're kids doesn't mean you have to treat them like they are deviod of intelligence completely. It just means you can't use swear words.

**wyokid** · 07-11-2012, 10:31 PM

After rewatching the series it was a LOT better than I remember and it brought back great memories of watching the show.

However:

Originally Posted by refrax5

I thought it was pretty good, but yeah, the jokes were awful, Eddie Brock and Peter always calling each other "bro" was really annoying and I thought Peter himself was just kind of an irritating character sometimes. It was a pretty good show overall, but I don't quite understand the obsession everyone has with it.

I agree with all of this, ESPECIALLY the obsession. On to SMTNAS!

EDIT:

Originally Posted by Darman456

This coming from the guy who like the Ultimate Spider-Man TV show? What? Are you even allowed to hate TSSM while liking USM? I swear there must be a law of nature that says that cannot happen. The Spectacular Spider-Man was the perfect Spider-Man show. The animations were fluid. The designs did grow on me (or they got better, not sure because every time I watch the first episodes compared to the last, the last look better). It's funny that Sony could get Spider-Man right but MARVEL has found a way to eff up Spider-Man. Let me remind you that these are both cartoons for children. The difference is, TSSM actually did a good job because it didn't treat the audience like they were stupid. Just because they're kids doesn't mean you have to treat them like they are deviod of intelligence completely. It just means you can't use swear words.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! XD You're funny man.

**FloodedJunior** · 07-11-2012, 10:47 PM

What made this show great, is the show not being only about Spider-Man but also being about Peter Parker. It showed that Spider-Man was human. It also captured the comedic aspect of Spider-Man perfectly. He cracked jokes that were funny. Also yeah Eddie Brock and Peter calling each other bro was really stupid in my opinion. But Peter actually being a highschool student with normal Highschool student things to do spiced up the series for me.

**FloodedJunior** · 07-11-2012, 10:54 PM

The importance of drawing in fans and catering to old fans is complicated. So I think the overall mistake was when they released it. When it first aired there wasn't a spiderman cartoon or movie really egging it on, so the drawing in of fans would have been important with this series. This is actually why I think it failed. Ultimate spiderman shouldn't need to cater to new fans with the release of the new spiderman movie. This is also why I think Ult will fail, [ I would like to see the series go on for at least 3 seasons]. Also I became a big spidey fan from spec so umm yeah.

**GamerSlyRatchet** · 07-12-2012, 08:43 AM

Originally Posted by FloodedJunior

The importance of drawing in fans and catering to old fans is complicated. So I think the overall mistake was when they released it. When it first aired there wasn't a spiderman cartoon or movie really egging it on, so the drawing in of fans would have been important with this series. This is actually why I think it failed. Ultimate spiderman shouldn't need to cater to new fans with the release of the new spiderman movie. This is also why I think Ult will fail, [ I would like to see the series go on for at least 3 seasons]. Also I became a big spidey fan from spec so umm yeah.

Actually, the show did fine in the ratings. The reason it failed was due to Kids WB closing down and Marvel buying both the rights to the show and animated Spidey in general, choosing to produce its own show, rather than commission more seasons to Sony.

**Darman456** · 07-12-2012, 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by wyokid

After rewatching the series it was a LOT better than I remember and it brought back great memories of watching the show.

However:

I agree with all of this, ESPECIALLY the obsession. On to SMTNAS!

EDIT:

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! XD You're funny man.

Say what you like about this series but it is INFINITELY better than that complete atroscity that is USM.

**Aziz Abbasi** · 07-12-2012, 11:08 AM

It had a title to live up to, and it did
Well handled stories
Great characterization
Fluid animation (differs from art style, for those who don't know, please keep note)
Nicely flavored soundtracks for the show

**Darman456** · 07-12-2012, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by Aziz Abbasi

It had a title to live up to, and it did
Well handled stories
Great characterization
Fluid animation (differs from art style, for those who don't know, please keep note)
Nicely flavored soundtracks for the show

**wyokid** · 07-12-2012, 08:31 PM

Originally Posted by KCJ506

No the animation was fine. Your problem seems to be with the animation style. That would be how the characters are drawn. The actual animation is the movement of the characters. Style is not animation. People mix these two up entirely too much.

Nope. I LOVED the character designs.

Originally Posted by Darman456

Say what you like about this series but it is INFINITELY better than that complete atroscity that is USM.

lol